In his 1945 essay “Notes on Nationalism,” Orwell distinguishes between the terms nationalism and patriotism. For Orwell, nationalism was “the habit of identifying oneself with a single nation or other unit, placing it beyond good and evil and recognizing no other duty than that of advancing its interests.” He was quick to point out that this was distinct from the concept of patriotism, which he defined as “devotion to a particular place and a particular way of life, which one believes to be the best in the world but has no wish to force on other people.”

Whether this Bible is an example of Christian nationalism I will leave to others. It is at least an example of Christian syncretism, a linking of certain myths about American exceptionalism and the Christian faith. This is the American church’s consistent folly: thinking that we are the protagonists in a story that began long before us and whose main character is in fact the Almighty.

Every member had to be careful, he advised, "toappear before the Slavic peoples as a master and show them thathe was a German.

The Jews had instigatedthe American boycott that had damaged Germany,

From the perspective of the regime, lettersfrom the front served to justify the war and to bind together the na-tion in a common purpose. Military officials underscored the im-portance of writing home; letters from the battle front supplied “akind of spiritual vitamin” for the home front and reinforced its “at-titude and nerves.

Lettersand photographs, and the effort to archive them, indicated the ex-tent to which soldiers deliberately placed themselves in world his-tory and adopted for themselves the heroicizing vantage of theThird Reich

Setapart from the familiar social contexts of family, work, and school,the closed camp was designed to break down identifications withsocial milieus and to promote Entbürgerlichung (purging bourgeoiselements) and Verkameradshaftung (comradeship) as part of theprocess of Volkwerdung, “the making of the people,” as the pecu-liar idiom of National Socialism put it.

Anti-semitism did not arrive on the scene as something completely new,but it acquired much greater symbolic value when people associ-ated it with being German.

part of a larger struggle to protect what so many Ger-mans regarded as the wounded, bleeding body of the nation.

one of the key purposes of popu-lar entertainment in the Third Reich: the creation of a commonlyshared culture to define Germans to one another and mark themoff from others.

“Hei hatte sagt, wer non ganz un gar nichwolle, vor dän in Deutschland keine Raum”—“he said there is noroom in Germany for people who simply refuse to take part.”

In September 1939, after the invasion of Po-land, unter uns became legally enforced Aryan space when a decreeprohibited Jews from owning or listening to radios;

Thecalamity of the unexpected surrender, the “bleeding borders” re-drawn in the postwar settlement at Versailles, and the overwhelm-ing chaos of the inflation in the early 1920s were collective experi-ences that made the suffering of the nation more comprehensible.During the Weimar years, the people’s community denoted the be-leaguered condition Germans shared, while expressing the politicalunity necessary for national renewal.

Arbeitsdienstmänner worked together as a unit, marched toget-her, and relaxed together, an unending group existence designed topull together the people’s community.

Boththe Hitler Youth and the Reich Labor Service aimed to mix bour-geois and working-class youths in order to pull down social barriersto the formation of national race consciousness.

Nazi pedagogues extolled das Lager, “the camp,”as the privileged place where the “new generation was finding itsform.”

But it also made demands on ordinary Germans, who neededto visualize the Volk as a vital racial subject, to choose appropriatemarriage partners, and to accept “limits to empathy.”

Racial thinking presumed thatonly the essential sameness of the German ethnic community guar-anteed biological strength. For the Nazis, the goal of racial puritymeant excluding Jews, whom they imagined to be a racially alienpeople who had fomented revolution and civil strife and divided theGerman people.

In place of the quarrels of party, the contests of inter-est, and the divisions of class, which they believed compromised theability of the nation to act, the Nazis proposed to build a unified ra-cial community guided by modern science. Such an endeavor wouldprovide Germany with the “unity of action” necessary to surviveand prosper in the dangerous conditions of the twentieth century

In other words, biology appeared to provideGermany with highly useful technologies of renovation. The Na-zis regarded racism as a scientifically grounded, self-consciouslymodern form of political organization.

As a result, Germans could imagine one another infront of the radio listening to the same program: “Sunday isWunschkonzert,” wrote one soldier to his family back home; “youcertainly will be listening too.”

He believed Germans feltthat “it’s just us now” when they lived without Jews. “Just us” alsoexpressed the closed circle in which Germans could see and experi-ence “ourselves” as “we are” and as “we have become.”

With the cheerful slices of German life they broadcastand the national audience they pulled together, radio plays recrea-ted the people’s community. It produced the effect of being unteruns, “just us.”

In what it touted as the triumph of “socialism ofthe deed” over “private capitalism” and “economic liberalism,” in1933 the Propaganda Ministry pressed a consortium of radio man-ufacturers to design and produce a Volksempfänger, or “people’sradio,” for the mass market.

Nazis wanted the Germanpeople to comprehend events on the order of grand history by hear-ing broadcasts on the radio, seeing the reassembly of marchers onfilm, and taking photographs of their own part in the making of thepeople’s community

Germans even went to warwith preprinted diaries that left space for snapshots. All this was anacknowledgment of the desire to be part of and to share the Ger-man history that was being made.

Radio helped to create the collective voice of thenation.

“People looked to Nazism as a great and radical sur-gery or cleansing” and therefore saw “the movement as a sourceof rejuvenation” in public life.

The Day of Potsdam and May Day indi-cated that there was considerable desire among Germans to partici-pate in rituals of national renewal

One-potmeals on the first Sunday of every month provided opportunitiesfor party representatives to go from door to door in the evening asthey collected the pfennigs that had been “saved,” and to snoop.

these auxiliary organiza-tions gave Germans semiofficial responsibilities as they collecteddonations, distributed coal, or trained as air-raid wardens.

Themedicalization of politics pulled thousands of new professionalsinto state service as nurses, teachers, health-care administrators.Newly opened public-health offices dotted the cities and country-side, building on the social-welfare accomplishments of the repub-lic.

a“Machbarkeitswahn,” modernity’s heady sense of the possible thatepitomized National Socialism as it charged into the future.

This is thesignificance of the Day of Potsdam: the images of unity were madeavailable for national consumption. The growth in radio ownershipespecially in 1933 and 1934 indicates how great the desire was topartake in Nazi spectacle, although the fact that radios remainedmuch less common in rural areas

Hitler repeatedly addressed workers as patriotswho had built Germany’s industrial strength and served honorablyin the war, but who had been unjustly oppressed by liberal eco-nomic orthodoxies. He employed a rhetoric of understanding andcompassion that recognized the perspective of the working class.Reviving the Nation • 47

Socialists around the worldhad celebrated May Day as a festival of labor since the 1880s; butin Germany they had failed to get the official recognition the Nazisnow offered. So strong were the hopes for national unity that theGerman Free Trade Unions welcomed the Nazi gesture and encour-aged members to participate in the celebrations.

National Socialism offered acomprehensive vision of renewal, which many Germans found ap-pealing, but they combined it with the alarming specter of nationaldisintegration.

He repeatedly described Ger-many as a nation that had come home to itself. While Erich hatedthe Nazis, he loved the Third Reich.

the desire to be part ofnational unity was so strong that it pulled even an anti-Nazi such asErich into the new political community

In the national broadcast, selected party members spoke out thescripted reactions of “ordinary citizens,” who, appearing from allwalks of life, expressed support for Hitler.

Held on 21 March 1933 in Potsdam’s Garnisonkirche, whereFrederick the Great lay buried, the Day of Potsdam aligned Hit-ler with revered Prussian traditions, the Hohenzollern dynasty andthe founding of the German Reich some sixty years earlier, andthe heroic sacrifices of the Great War, represented by the “hero ofTannenberg,” President Paul von Hindenburg,

“I was overcomewith a burning desire to belong to these people for whom it was amatter of life and death.” Maschmann herself was drawn to the“socialist tendency” of the Nazi movement, the idea of the people’scommunity,

the “August Days” of 1914, when thou-sands of Germans rallied in the streets to support the national causein time of war, revealed extraordinary emotional investment in thepromise of national unity.

The enduring popularity of the Nazis rested on the idea of theVolksgemeinschaft, or people’s community.

the officially organized boycott of Jewish businesses on 1April 1933 required a more considered answer. Elisabeth beganwith a concession, contrasting the “happiness” of the world-histor-ical events taking place in Germany with her “sympathy” for “thefate of the individual.”

Most of these enthusiasts were idealists who wanted to create auniversal language which would help international relations and unite theworld. This noble hope stood in contrast with – and probably in reaction to –the rise of nationalisms in the late nineteenth century. Over 150 newlanguages were created in this period, the best-known being Volapük (1879),Pasilingua (1885), Esperanto (originally called Lingvo Internacia) (1887),Spelin (1888), Spokil (1889), Mundolingue (1889), and Ido (1907).

In 1941, he published "Wells, Hitler and the World State," in which he argued that Germany hewed much closer to a well-run society in which everyone thinks similarly and along scientific lines than England ever has. But it was run by a "criminal lunatic," so that didn't work out quite as Wells thought it would. Orwell also noted that patriotism, which Wells thought of as civilization-destroying, was the primary force inducing Russians and Britons to fight against Hitler.

all of these big Evangelical Ministries have Global arms Christian radio is is a really big deal 00:47:51 in Christian television in Africa and Christian publishing dominates uh Evan White Evangelical American publishing dominates markets Christian markets like in Brazil

so this was something that was in the air was that if they mainstreamed white supremacy correctly they could get 00:06:13 people to buy into it and not back away because they were afraid of being called racist

trying to figure out ways 00:06:38 that you could access people and make them feel like it's okay to lean into white nationalism that they don't have to be afraid of being branded with that label

they come from every socioeconomic status they're lawyers they have grad degrees they have college degrees and there's also people who come into it who only have a high school degree 00:01:53 but i think we really miss something if we believe that the white people in america and in other countries who are attracted to this movement come only from poverty or uneducated it's not accurate

i try to use the term white supremacy to talk about that history and white nationalism to talk about this 00:02:31 social movement and because it's a movement where people recognize each other they know uh their friends

η γεωγραφική δομή του ελληνικού κόσμου είχε εδρασθεί στηνικανότητα των παράκτιων κοινοτήτων του είτε να επιβιώνουν είτε ως ανεξάρτητεςοντότητες έναντι ανοργάνωτων πληθυσμών του εσωτερικού, είτε (όταν είχαν απωλέσειτην ανεξαρτησία τους) να χρησιμοποιούν το προστατευτικό πλαίσιο των (εξ ορισμού,πολυεθνικών) αυτοκρατοριών για τον ίδιο λόγο.

Κατά τρόπο ειρωνικό, η επιτυχία της χώρας κατά τους Βαλκανικούς Πολέμουςαφενός επέλυσε - ανέλπιστα ευνοϊκά - το πρόβλημα των άμεσων προτεραιοτήτων στηνΚρήτη και τη Μακεδονία. Παρέμεναν όμως ανοικτά τα μέτωπα στη Βόρεια Ήπειρο,Θράκη, Ανατολικό Αιγαίο, Ιωνία, Πόντο, Κύπρο, μαζί με τον κίνδυνο μιας νέας βουλ-γαρικής προσπάθειας στην κατεύθυνση της ελληνικής Μακεδονίας

υτά τα δεδομένα άρχισαν να αλλάζουν δραματικά στον 19ο αιώνα, οπότε επήλθεη άνοδος των άλλων βαλκανικών εθνικισμών.7 Στο πλαίσιο αυτό, ο ελληνικός κόσμος,και ειδικά η ηγεσία του ελληνικού κράτους βρέθηκε σε μια πολύ δύσκολη θέση: ηγεωγραφική περιοχή που ενδιέφερε ήταν αχανής (τουλάχιστον για τα μέσα που δι-έθετε το μικρό ελληνικό κράτος), οι πιθανοί αντίπαλοι πολλαπλοί, και σε περίπτωσηαπώλειας μιας περιοχής, αυτή δεν επανέκαμπτε σε μια αυτοκρατορική οντότητα, αλλάπεριερχόταν σε ένα άλλο έθνος - κράτος, με τους Έλληνες στην θέση μιας προνομιού-χου (και άρα συνήθως στοχοποιημένης) μειονότητας, της οποίας η επιβίωση δύσκολαθα εξασφαλιζόταν.

Ωστόσο, η Δίκη των Εξ αποτελούσε παρωδία δικαστικήςδιαδικασίας και οδήγησε, ουσιαστικά, σε μια δικαστικήδολοφονία.

Americans who believe not only in the spiritual heritage of our nation, but believe that we ought to use elections to help return our country to its Christian foundation."

Texas megachurch pastor Robert Jeffress said over the weekend that Christian nationalists had a right to "impose their values" on everyone else.

Ήταν η πρώτη φορά που ένα πολιτικό κόμμα, μετονομάζοντας τη βασιλοφροσύνη σε εθνικοφροσύνη, επιχειρούσε έμμεσα να αμφισβητήσει το εθνικό φρόνημα των αντιπάλων του, «μια επικίνδυνος πρόκλησις προς την νοημοσύνην του ελληνικού λαού», όπως σημείωνε, ήδη από τότε, η «Νέα Ημέρα» (7/1/1915). Και η ειρωνεία της εκλογικής πραγματικότητας ήταν ότι προνομιούχο ακροατήριο των πρώτων εθνικοφρόνων αναδείχτηκαν οι εθνικοθρησκευτικές μειονότητες της Μακεδονίας.

The danger is in conflating our Christian identity and our national identity. We can be Christian, we can also be American. But to assume that being American means being Christian and that being Christian means holding to a narrow view of what it means to be American is limiting to all of the above.

To assume that one side works on behalf of God while the other works in rejection of Divine order is a perversion of the unity that could exist in, at least, recognizing shared spiritual ideals. That spiritual unity cannot exist when we suggest that true Christians either wear red hats and carry “Don’t Tread on Me” flags or do not.

What is Christian Nationalism? “Christian nationalism identifies the nation with God's will and action in the world; conflates national and Christian identity; and identifies service of the nation with service of God,” writes Dr. David W. Scott, who is a Methodist historical researcher and the Director of Mission Theology at the General Board of Global Ministries of The United Methodist Church. “Christian nationalism gives moral cover for actions, even unseemly ones, taken in pursuit of national or political goals.” Dr. Kristin Kobes Du Mez, author of Jesus and John Wayne, takes the idea that Christian nationalism provides moral cover a step further, noting that Christian nationalism adheres to “the belief that America is God’s chosen nation and must be defended as such.” 

Today, the people in politics who most often invoke the name of Jesus for their political causes tend to be the most merciless and judgmental, the most consumed by rage and fear and vengeance. They hate their enemies, and they seem to want to make more of them. They claim allegiance to the truth and yet they have embraced, even unwittingly, lies. They have inverted biblical ethics in the name of biblical ethics.

Samuel Perry, a sociology professor at the University of Oklahoma, a scholar of Christian nationalism, and himself a person of the Christian faith

Renan's definition of a nation has been extremely influential. This was given in his 1882 discourse Qu'est-ce qu'une nation? ("What is a Nation?"). Whereas German writers like Fichte had defined the nation by objective criteria such as a race or an ethnic group "sharing common characteristics" (language, etc.), Renan defined it by the desire of a people to live together, which he summarized by a famous phrase, "avoir fait de grandes choses ensemble, vouloir en faire encore" (having done great things together and wishing to do more).

It would be just as easy (actually, rather easier) to identify things thatcan be interpreted as the first stirrings of rationalism, legality,deliberative democracy and so forth all over the world, and only thentell the story of how they coalesced into the current global system.24

it isn’t simply the case that much of what is distinctive about American evangelicalism is not essential to Christianity; it is that now, in important respects, much of what is distinctive about American evangelicalism has become antithetical to authentic Christianity. What we’re dealing with—not in all cases, of course, but in far too many— is political identity and cultural anxieties, anti-intellectualism and ethnic nationalism, resentments and grievances, all dressed up as Christianity.

I know a number of my subs and viewers are in India and I've noticed on Twitter and on Abhijit Chavda's channel that there's quite a bit of controversy about the way Indian History is taught to Indian students. That interests me a lot, but what I'm PARTICULARLY interested in is, how World History surveys throughout the world cover world history. If part of this involves continuing the narratives introduced by colonizers, like the Aryan Invasion myth, that's relevant to my question.

If your goal is to slow climate change, or reverse inequality, or stop racism, or rebuild democracy, you will need the national solidarity that comes from patriotism.

But Smart Americans are uneasy with patriotism. It’s an unpleasant relic of a more primitive time, like cigarette smoke or dog racing. It stirs emotions that can have ugly consequences. The winners in Smart America—connected by airplane, internet, and investments to the rest of the globe—have lost the capacity and the need for a national identity, which is why they can’t grasp its importance for others. Their passionate loyalty, the one that gives them a particular identity, goes to their family. The rest is diversity and efficiency, heirloom tomatoes and self-driving cars. They don’t see the point of patriotism.

The point here is not to defend the uses of surveillance technology in China, the point is to emphasize that when big tech talks about China they are stoking Sinophobia in order to distract from their own malfeasance. By screeching with nationalistic panic “look what they’re doing over there!” the tech companies shift the conversation from what they themselves are doing over here.

There's an interesting suggestion associated with this, that periodic fasting causes autophagy, which Taleb claims is an evolutionary process by which the weaker proteins are broken down first. If this is true, then always having a full stomach is another way of subsidizing the unfit and weakening the organism.

a system of explicit group privilege that, in the name of “social justice,” demands equal results and explicitly sorts citizens into “protected classes” based on race and other demographic categories.

Note that Jay lists six factors binding the American people together, of which principle is only one—the most important or decisive one, but still only one, and insufficient by itself. The American founders understood that, for republicanism to function and endure, a republican people must share a large measure of commonality in manners, customs, language, and dedication to the common good.

one united people—a people descended from the same ancestors, speaking the same language, professing the same religion, attached to the same principles of government, very similar in their manners and customs

“Beannacht libh,” cried Miss Ivors, with a laugh, as she ran down the staircase.

Perhaps this very prospect of centuries of boredom at the end of history will serve to get history started once again.

What keeps this type of more sophisticated nationalism, or patriotism, liberal or progressive is that it is intended to be nonexclusive. You take pride in your country’s achievements while recognising that other countries can take pride in theirs. And you don’t exclude or demonise outsiders. But how easy is it to maintain this position? At the very least, it takes work to prevent it from sliding into the dangerous blind loyalty that breeds racism and xenophobia. The crowd can form too quickly.

Intellectuals have ignored nationalism at their peril. Yet they could adopt it at their peril too

In fascist literature, we see repeated a language of enemies, traitors, parasites and foreigners, and the dehumanising metaphors of pigs, dogs, rats and cockroaches, accompanied by the readiness for violent action by paramilitary and extrajudicial forces.

The idea of the need to restore national purity is common to all fascisms. As the American political scientist and historian Robert Paxton wrote in The Anatomy of Fascism (2004): ‘Fascisms seek out in each national culture those themes that are best capable of mobilising a mass movement of regeneration, unification, and purity, directed against liberal individualism and constitutionalism and against Leftist class struggle.’ This allows a person ‘the gratification of submerging oneself in a wave of shared feelings’.

Religious conflict in any form is often far more impervious to pragmatic solutions, and can prove more dangerous than national conflicts.

Soon Ja Du

This is the sort of ambiguous comment which seems to invite an assenting nod of the head but could easily have been uttered by Nigel Farage. Similarly, 'Irish Blood, English Heart', in which he sang, I've been dreaming of a time when/ To be English is not to be baneful /To be standing by the flag not feeling shameful/ Racist or partial/ Irish blood, English heart, this I'm made of /There is no one on earth I'm afraid of/ And I will die with both of my hands untied."

The former Smiths frontman has become an increasingly controversial figure in recent years for a string of remarks and his support for the far right. He voiced support for EDL founder Tommy Robinson in the wake of his sentencing for contempt of court, saying: “It’s very obvious that Labour or the Tories do not believe in free speech … I mean, look at the shocking treatment of Tommy Robinson.” He described halal meat preparation as evil and “requires certification that can only be given by supporters of Isis”; he told the NME in 2007 that “the higher the influx into England the more the British identity disappears … the gates of England are flooded. The country’s been thrown away”; and in 2010 described Chinese people as a “subspecies”.

She’d become a devotee of Joe Sobran, the late Catholic columnist who was fired from National Review after falling out with William F. Buckley and whose writings deeply influenced the paleoconservative movement, which emphasizes nationalism and noninterventionism. Over the course of his career, Sobran’s writing on Israel and Jews became extreme, and he associated with Holocaust deniers and questioned Holocaust history. McHugh had liked Ron Paul, for whom she was slightly too young to vote in 2008, so a friend at church had told her to read Sobran’s “The Reluctant Anarchist.” In the piece, written in 2002, Sobran describes how he moved away from the ideology of mainstream conservatism and toward becoming a “philosophical anarchist.” Sobran opposed the concept of the state as a unifying force of government; he opposed the very idea of so-called constitutional government. The argument made sense to the budding young libertarian in Pennsylvania. “That was my step into the right,” she said. “I think I’ve read every single thing Sobran’s ever written.” Sobran’s death was also her introduction to even further-right media; when he died in 2010, her online search for obituaries led her to the VDare and American Renaissance websites, she said.

IF WE ADMIT for the moment that the fascist and communist challenges to liberalism are dead, are there any other ideological competitors left? Or put another way, are there contradictions in liberal society beyond that of class that are not resolvable? Two possibilities suggest themselves, those of religion and nationalism.

After the war, it seemed to most people that German fascism as well as its other European and Asian variants were bound to self-destruct. There was no material reason why new fascist movements could not have sprung up again after the war in other locales, but for the fact that expansionist ultranationalism, with its promise of unending conflict leading to disastrous military defeat, had completely lost its appeal. The ruins of the Reich chancellery as well as the atomic bombs dropped on Hiroshima and Nagasaki killed this ideology on the level of consciousness as well as materially, and all of the pro-fascist movements spawned by the German and Japanese examples like the Peronist movement in Argentina or Subhas Chandra Bose's Indian National Army withered after the war.

The world is being undone before us. History is once more moving, and it is moving to fragmentation on the basis of concocted differences, toward the destruction of democracy using not coups and guns to entrench autocracies and dictators, but the ballot box and social media. The bonfire of our vanities is fully loaded with the fuel of growing inequality, fear, and division We see gay and transgender people being once more scapegoated, and we see race and religion used to divide. We see truth everywhere denied. Duterte. Orbán. Erdoğan. Putin. Democracy is withering in Poland. Slovakia. Cambodia. Once great nations are lost in division that with each passing day grows more intractable. The chaos of Brexit. The catastrophe of Trump’s white nationalism. My warning is this: if we here in Australia do not reimagine ourselves we will be undone too.

And as I boarded flight after flight, making my way slowly northwards, I wondered what joins us over such a vast expanse, what connects wintry worlds with tropical? What finally joins us as people into this idea that we call Australia? And the answer is story. The story of us as a nation. The story of us as Australia and as being Australian.

“Everything that contributes to bind us in one vast empire together, to quicken the sympathy that makes us feel from the icy North to the sunny South that we are one family, each a member of a great and free Nation, not merely the unit of a remote locality, is worthy of being cherished.”

The Empire does not require that its servants love each other, merely that they perform their duty.

Where sturdy peasants plough the plain? Where mountain-sons bright metal gain?

To shield the land, the one true land, One Deutschland and one fatherland!

Where pirate-princes rule?

The content included YouTube videos of American white nationalists, a hate preacher banned in the UK and a controversial Islamist preacher.

The Guardian has withdrawn all its online advertising from Google and YouTube after it emerged that its ads were being inadvertently placed next to extremist material.

people in other countries should be seen primarily as rivals to be defeated.

historical political boundaries of the native Americans

Developing this theme, I show that Athens has been author of all the advantages which the Hellenes now enjoy. Then, having concluded the account of these benefactions, and desiring to show more convincingly that leadership in the expedition is the right of Athens, I further try to prove that far greater honor is due to her for the perils she has faced in war than for her other benefactions.